News / National
Lunga-Mbatha awarded US$47 850 for unfair dismissal by CZI
20 Jan 2024 at 03:34hrs | Views
In a David and Goliath protracted legal battle spanning over 20 years, Zimbabwean women and children's rights activist Rita Marque Lunga-Mbatha has been awarded US$47 850.01 for unfair dismissal over 20 years ago by her former employer, Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries (CZI).
Lunga-Mbatha, who represented herself in court throughout as she had overwhelming evidence, was awarded US$180 000 compensation for a sexual harassment case involving her former boss at CZI Farai Zizhou, way back in 2003.
Zizhou, who was then CZI chief executive, lost a huge house in Hatfield, Harare, in the process.
Lunga-Mbatha was demanding US$500 000 from CZI.
High Court Justice Gladys Mhuri awarded Lunga-Mbatha US$47 850.01 compensation for unfair dismissal in a 16 January 2024 judgement.
Lunga-Mbatha had already won US$180 000 in damages for sexual harassment.
Said Lunga-Mbatha:
"In 2003 I suffered debilitating sexual harassment at work at the hands of my former boss Mr Farai Zizhou who was then the chief executive officer of the CZI. I told the then president of the CZI, Mr Anthony Mandiwanza, who said as a married woman I should be ashamed to aver that I had been sexually harassed. After this, I was dismissed from employment and I went on to take the matter with the Labour Court.
"During the several hearings before many arbitrators, I was asked humiliating and demeaning questions. But when the matter was eventually concluded, the ruling was in my favour."
She continued:
"The CZI appealed against the decision of the arbitrator at the Labour Court and their appeal was upheld. I then appealed against the decision of the Labour Court at the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in my favour in June 2017. After that, I filed for compensation from my former employer."
In an October 2021 judgment, High Court Justice Joseph Mafusire said:
"The plaintiff (Lunga-Mbatha) claims a default judgment for sexual harassment. She is unrepresented. The matter appeared on the unopposed motion roll on 20 October 2021.
It was one of several such appearances.
"In the past the matter would be removed from the roll for one reason or other. The matter has had a long and turbulent history.
"The plaintiff says the wheels of justice have turned ever so slowly for her. There can be no denying that. She has been to this court. She has been to arbitration. She has been to the Supreme Court. She is back in this court. She strives for closure.
"Any lesser mortal would probably have given up. Plainly, the plaintiff is no lesser mortal. Her tenacity and fighting spirit have moved mountains. She is still fighting.
"This judgment only settles half the case. The other half still continues. I shall explain.
"Nature of claim: The plaintiff has pleaded sexual harassment at the work place in 2002 to 2003. Then she was employed by the second defendant (CZI). She alleges that sexual harassment of female employees at the second defendant's work place was rampant.
"She says as against herself, the first defendant (Zizhou) was the sole culprit. He was the Chief Executive Officer. She was his personal assistant. She says despite reporting him, the second defendant, through its President, was flippant, if not contemptuous.
"Her claim is for US$500 000 [five hundred thousand United States dollars]. It is against both defendants. Initially they both defended vigorously. But by and by she barred the first defendant in default of a plea. That did not just happen. It was after sweat and blood.
The details emerge later. But having barred the first defendant she now seeks a default judgment as against him only.
"As against the second defendant the case continues. At the time of this judgment, it was poised for a pre-trial conference.
"Details of the claim: The sexual harassment was over some nine months. It started when she was still on probation. She got employed by the second defendant in September 2002. She got fired in July 2003. It was an unfair dismissal. The first defendant engineered it all. He schemed it. She had reported him for the sexual harassment. He took revenge."
Lunga-Mbatha, who represented herself in court throughout as she had overwhelming evidence, was awarded US$180 000 compensation for a sexual harassment case involving her former boss at CZI Farai Zizhou, way back in 2003.
Zizhou, who was then CZI chief executive, lost a huge house in Hatfield, Harare, in the process.
Lunga-Mbatha was demanding US$500 000 from CZI.
High Court Justice Gladys Mhuri awarded Lunga-Mbatha US$47 850.01 compensation for unfair dismissal in a 16 January 2024 judgement.
Lunga-Mbatha had already won US$180 000 in damages for sexual harassment.
Said Lunga-Mbatha:
"In 2003 I suffered debilitating sexual harassment at work at the hands of my former boss Mr Farai Zizhou who was then the chief executive officer of the CZI. I told the then president of the CZI, Mr Anthony Mandiwanza, who said as a married woman I should be ashamed to aver that I had been sexually harassed. After this, I was dismissed from employment and I went on to take the matter with the Labour Court.
"During the several hearings before many arbitrators, I was asked humiliating and demeaning questions. But when the matter was eventually concluded, the ruling was in my favour."
She continued:
"The CZI appealed against the decision of the arbitrator at the Labour Court and their appeal was upheld. I then appealed against the decision of the Labour Court at the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in my favour in June 2017. After that, I filed for compensation from my former employer."
In an October 2021 judgment, High Court Justice Joseph Mafusire said:
"The plaintiff (Lunga-Mbatha) claims a default judgment for sexual harassment. She is unrepresented. The matter appeared on the unopposed motion roll on 20 October 2021.
It was one of several such appearances.
"In the past the matter would be removed from the roll for one reason or other. The matter has had a long and turbulent history.
"The plaintiff says the wheels of justice have turned ever so slowly for her. There can be no denying that. She has been to this court. She has been to arbitration. She has been to the Supreme Court. She is back in this court. She strives for closure.
"Any lesser mortal would probably have given up. Plainly, the plaintiff is no lesser mortal. Her tenacity and fighting spirit have moved mountains. She is still fighting.
"This judgment only settles half the case. The other half still continues. I shall explain.
"Nature of claim: The plaintiff has pleaded sexual harassment at the work place in 2002 to 2003. Then she was employed by the second defendant (CZI). She alleges that sexual harassment of female employees at the second defendant's work place was rampant.
"She says as against herself, the first defendant (Zizhou) was the sole culprit. He was the Chief Executive Officer. She was his personal assistant. She says despite reporting him, the second defendant, through its President, was flippant, if not contemptuous.
"Her claim is for US$500 000 [five hundred thousand United States dollars]. It is against both defendants. Initially they both defended vigorously. But by and by she barred the first defendant in default of a plea. That did not just happen. It was after sweat and blood.
The details emerge later. But having barred the first defendant she now seeks a default judgment as against him only.
"As against the second defendant the case continues. At the time of this judgment, it was poised for a pre-trial conference.
"Details of the claim: The sexual harassment was over some nine months. It started when she was still on probation. She got employed by the second defendant in September 2002. She got fired in July 2003. It was an unfair dismissal. The first defendant engineered it all. He schemed it. She had reported him for the sexual harassment. He took revenge."
Source - newhawks
